pimpmyguncreationsfandomcom-20200216-history
Talk:FAC MP4.8/@comment-25342116-20161227014356/@comment-25342116-20161228100628
In case you're lazy to read it all, I'm gonna give you a brief summary : 1) Why classify it as an AR? The caliber is a small, but glorified one, so that doesn't make it an AR. But I might be wrong. 2) How high is your tendency to try shooting a target 400 meters away with your weapon? Please consider you are in a far away position while taking the shot. 3) If you would, then why you don't mount your weapon a power scope? You wouldn't use it for CQB anyway. 4) If you wouldn't, then why would you disregard iron sights as terrible? You would use it for suppression, which doesn't require much of aiming. Note : If you have an advantage you would like to have, please write down the answers where you are in a disadvantage first. If it was lighter than a loaded and unequipped AR, then why even bother classifying it as an AR? Not an SMG? Perhaps the caliber? The 4.8x33mm, which is classified as a sub caliber, failed to fit the barrel diameter of your weapon, thus you put in a more suitable casing, the plastic 7.62x33mm, which of course with the help of the tungsten was able to project the power of it's more powerful predecessors, but again, it's a small caliber. You could probably classify it as a PDW, but again, it's not an AR. I might be wrong on this point, but I did my research. For the sake of the arguement, which from my previous comments I classified your weapon as an SMG instead of an AR, because I simply couldn't fathom why would you still insist on long range engagements. I never actually tested a real life H&K arms, but you mentioned that H&K's blowback is precise and hits deep with the help of the modified caliber. So I had to improve my arguement, which from "Why use a scope" to "Why not use a bigger scope?" Because it's the perfect tool for CQB and suppressive attacks, but you wanted too much. The average SMG's are able to hit up to 400 ranges as well. I'm gonna take the MP5 as an example, and this one is probably like only half the range, because it's 9x19mm, like come on. The reason I choose this is because you favored it's precise and low recoil delayed blowback. Now my question is, have you ever see someone, tried to shoot someone more than 100 meters away with an MP5? Or mount an adjustable magnification optic onto it? 200 meters is a good sniping range, and even more with 400 meters and a special caliber, but do you seriously intend to shoot a 200 meter target with an MP5 with a scope? And let's say it's a normal thing to do, then why not mount an actual power scope? Afterall, the purpose of a firearm is to kill at long range and avoid contact. Not to mention the powerful 900 m/s velocity, which I don't even know if it's true, because the even the CBJ-MS is not that powerful. About iron sights, well according to your opinion, they are terrible, as they are quite time consuming to use, but I didn't mention why. Here's why, iron sights offer the least weight possible, and lining up the sights is one of the fundamentals of CQB. I might sound stupid, but if you don't know how to properly aim with an iron sight simply because reflex or red dots are better, then you don't know the actual use of an SMG. I keep insisting on CQB because you are simply abusing factual information of a weapon, whereas in real life, the tendency to use an automatic weapon to its maximum effective range is almost nil.